I have so many of these that I don’t want to create separate threads for, so I thought I might nest them all.
My current issue/annoyance is that I think Listunova and pretty much all gymnasts performing the newly popular FHS + Front Tuck sequence are incorrectly credited for ‘handsprings’ that are really just (quick) front walkovers. This would result in a 0.2 tenth D-score discrepancy.
How would it be possible for hands and feet to touch the beam simultaneously in a skill with flight?
Even Ou Yushan, who I suppose might technically squeak into qualifying for flight, I think ought to be scrutinized more carefully on her version of this sequence, because in terms of technique it’s still a far cry from the way the skill is described and illustrated.
There’s actually yet another issue with this combination that I’ve just now noticed, which is that based on how it’s being performed, the front salto could arguably be credited a ‘C’ based on the illustrations below that distinguish the “takeoff from one leg”.
Even if we ignore issue #1 that I posed, and pretend that these gymnasts are indeed performing “front handspring stepouts” – imagine this sequence on floor exercise: is it possible to perform a “front handspring stepout” into a front tuck that is not “from one leg”? I suppose the possible distinction on beam is that it’s basically always accepted that your legs are staggered on takeoff – but none of these is the clear rebounding/punch front technique that seems to be required to credit as 5.410.
(Contrast this to what I would consider an exemplary punching front tuck combo done by Elle Mueller).
She was amazing. Competed a front triple twist on floor as a junior in 2002. Then got injured, made it back for the 2nd half of 2003 then was injured again in 2004 and retired. Later made the Russian national team as a weightlifter.
In the rebounding connection, the handspring will always be considered as a “B-element”, because it is necessary to gain speed to perform the salto. The Acro series will be recognized.
If there is no rebounding connection after the handspring, the flight must be visible.
So, to simplify - if you do a FWD handspring WITHOUT a rebounding connection AFTER, it MUST show flight. If you do a fast FWD walkover FOLLOWED by rebounding (I.e - FWD salto) it will always be recognized as a FWD handpring.
yeah I think the “landing position” of the “front handspring” is better suited to bringing the chest forward and up, creating a slight hollow, which lends itself well to a subsequent tuck position… if that makes sense. I’m not a coach either, just using my eye here
Wow! OK, so I am relieved at least to know that this issue hasn’t been completely ignored… But, at the same time, this decision/guidance is just total nonsense. A front walkover is less risky and daring than a front handspring precisely because you don’t have to fling your legs blindly toward the beam, and instead get to support yourself on 1 leg and 2 arms simultaneously, and that fact is not diminished by tossing a front tuck afterward.
Daria Elizarova had an amazing switch leap to punch front as a junior.
Yulia Lozhechko was a master at punch fronts and did some insane combinations such as bhs Arabian punch front. More commonly she did bhs back tuck front tuck. It was brilliant because even when she missed the connection she’d casually do a punch front from a cold, hard stand